Skip to main content
Glama

Search notes, guides and pillars

search_content
Read-onlyIdempotent

Search notes, guides, and/or pillars by title/summary. type optional: notes|guides|pillars|all. Education only, not financial advice.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "q": "<q>"
    },
    "name": "search_content"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
qYesSearch text matched against note, guide and pillar titles and summaries, e.g. lightning address
typeNoWhich content type to search: notes, guides, pillars, or all (default).all

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
hitsYes
countYes
queryYes
disclaimerYes
ranking_noteYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
      +  "additionalProperties": true,
      +  "properties": {
      +    "count": {
      +      "type": "integer"
      +    },
      +    "disclaimer": {
      +      "type": "string"
      +    },
      +    "hits": {
      +      "items": {
      +        "additionalProperties": true,
      +        "properties": {
      +          "id": {
      +            "type": "string"
      +          },
      +          "path": {
      +            "type": "string"
      +          },
      +          "summary": {
      +            "type": "string"
      +          },
      +          "tags": {
      +            "items": {
      +              "type": "string"
      +            },
      +            "type": "array"
      +          },
      +          "title": {
      +            "type": "string"
      +          },
      +          "type": {
      +            "type": "string"
      +          },
      +          "url": {
      +            "type": "string"
      +          }
      +        },
      +        "required": [
      +          "type",
      +          "id",
      +          "title",
      +          "summary",
      +          "path",
      +          "url"
      +        ],
      +        "type": "object"
      +      },
      +      "type": "array"
      +    },
      +    "query": {
      +      "additionalProperties": true,
      +      "properties": {
      +        "q": {
      +          "type": "string"
      +        },
      +        "type": {
      +          "type": "string"
      +        }
      +      },
      +      "required": [
      +        "q",
      +        "type"
      +      ],
      +      "type": "object"
      +    },
      +    "ranking_note": {
      +      "type": "string"
      +    }
      +  },
      +  "required": [
      +    "disclaimer",
      +    "query",
      +    "ranking_note",
      +    "count",
      +    "hits"
      +  ],
      +  "type": "object"
      +}
  2. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / q / description
      Added value: +"Search text matched against note, guide and pillar titles and summaries, e.g. lightning address"
    • addedInput schema / properties / type / default
      Added value: +"all"
    • addedInput schema / properties / type / description
      Added value: +"Which content type to search: notes, guides, pillars, or all (default)."
  3. First observed

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior3/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint=false, and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds the useful behavioral detail that matching is against titles and summaries only, plus a domain constraint ("Education only, not financial advice"), but says nothing about result limits, ranking, or empty-result behavior.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the core search scope, with no redundant phrasing. The trailing disclaimer is arguably peripheral but compact and carries guardrail value for the agent.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With only two fully documented parameters, an output schema present, and annotations covering safety and idempotency, the description covers what is needed to invoke it correctly. The main residual gap is routing guidance against the list_* and search_directory siblings.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, including the enum values and default for type, so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description only restates the enum inline and confirms the matched fields; it adds no format, casing, or multi-term syntax guidance beyond the schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description gives a specific verb and resource ("Search notes, guides, and/or pillars") plus a field-scope qualifier ("by title/summary"), which separates it from the list_* siblings. It stops short of naming any sibling explicitly, so an agent must infer the search-vs-list split.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Usage is only implied: the word "Search" plus the title/summary scope suggests using this when you have a query string, but the description never states when to prefer it over list_notes, list_guides, list_pillars, or search_directory. No exclusions or prerequisites are given.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources